×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

(OP)
2nd Edition, Chapter 1, Article 1 the following statement is made and is key to the solution: "The lateral strain in the y direction must be zero in order to maintain continuity in the plate during bending..."

I don't grasp that concept. It seems to me like there could be a small amount of strain in the y direction, and rather than a loss of continuity, the cross section of the plate would end up as a trapezoid.

What am I missing?

Thanks in advance!

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

Pperlich:
That statement is a simplification, an idealized condition, but pretty close to the truth vs. the real world or exact condition, and for a long or infinitely long plate; so that a strip of unit width can be used and analyzed as representing a typical strip anywhere in the plate length, removed from too near the ends of the plate or reaction locations. This simplification is akin to the simplification Timoshenko makes when talking about ‘Plane Stress’ and ‘Plane Strain,’ in chap. 2 of his “Theory of Elasticity” text. This was pretty much a basic assumption, a first step, in simplifying many of our daily engineering analysis problems, until we really do start thinking three dimensionally about a volume of material under load.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

(OP)
dhengr,

Thanks for the reply. I guess that make sense. Just for fun I decided to run the math using the assumption that the stress in the y direction was 0. No surprise here, but I ended up with EI(d2w/dx2) = -M. So I guess the width of the plate makes the zero y-strain a more appropriate simplification than a zero y-stress simplification.

Greg, I don't know what you mean by your question exactly.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

(OP)
Greg: No, at the corner the lateral strain would be zero but that doesn't mean that away from the corners that the lateral strain is necessarily zero. Since the simplification of zero lateral strain is made, then the lateral stress must be non-zero. But at the unrestrained corner you can't have a lateral stress either, right?

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

He's cutting a unit strip from a wide piece of plate. If the Y-strain varies through the thickness, that corresponds to the plate curling in the crosswise direction. In which case, you don't have cylindrical bending, you have dishing of the plate.

If you have a beam, you assume zero stress in the Y-direction and whatever strain occurs, there it is- the comopression flange can get wider and the tension flange can get narrower when bent. With a wide plate or wide bar, the compression and tension faces are tied together and can't move sideways relative to each other, so you assume zero strain rather than zero stress.

When I was in college in an ME lab, we did a strain-gauge test of a beam, which was a flat bar about an inch wide and 1/8" thick. Our strains were off somewhat from what they should have been, and it was only years later, I figured out why- from this effect. I believe Roark mentions it in connection with flat bars bent the easy way.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

(OP)
Thanks JStephen! I didn't think about the curling aspect. That makes it make much more sense now! I remember doing a similar lab, but I don't recall what the lateral strain did. I still have all my notes. I'm half tempted to go look it up, lol.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

If I remember right, that throws in a factor of (1-nu^2) or about 10% difference on the deflection.
And now that I think about it, maybe we were measuring deflection of the beam, rather than strain with strain gauges- it's been a while.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

(OP)
Thanks for the heads-up! I must be a serious nerd, because I love reading this book. Granted I'm only in Chapter 1 still, but its a good read. My old boss used to joke about how the ASME BPVC was "a good read". But this book actually is!

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

Yup. Ol' Tim O'Shenko had a pretty good way with the words, like most Irishmen.

(joke stolen shamelessly from Greg)

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

Speaking of which- if you actually enjoy reading his stuff- get "History of the Strength of Materials" (was available cheap from Dover Books at one time, I assume it still is.)

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

I think his Theory of Plates and Shells was available on the (gutenberg project)? as a free pdf. Wherever. Greg pointed to the site awhile back, and I searched on the author and found the pdf file. It's in my download folder...which reminds me to transfer it to my personal thumb drive. Hmm, 55 Mb...need the big toe drive...

A quick google found this link. http://155.207.34.6/files/Timoshenko.pdf

Some light beach reading.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

(OP)
Call me old fashioned, but I like an actual book in my hand. I hate trying to read books on my computer/tablet/phone etc. That said I also have this book saved in pdf to my dropbox.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

I cannot disagree with that pperlich. My wife had three of Timoshenko's texts, which mysteriously disappeared in our last move using a commercial hauler.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

The thickness of the plate thickness is assumed not change after the deformation. In other word, at any given cross section of the plate, the relative displacement of any layers of the plate along y direction is same. Therefore the strain of the plater in y direction is zero. In reality, there should have small plate thickness change and strain along y direction.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

A groundbreaker in the Mechanical and Structural engineering field .....He wrote seminal works in the areas of engineering mechanics, elasticity and strength of materials,

Russian born Stephen P. Timoshenko is widely considered to be the father of Engineering Mechanics


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Timoshenko

MJCronin
Sr. Process Engineer

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

(OP)
@ jiang46602,
I appreciate your response, but in the text the plate thickness is in the z-direction. The unloaded plate is in the xy-plane.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

Sorry for the misleading. I read the document again and thought a possible explanation.

One implicit assumption of the analysis model of taking one strip of the plate as independent beam is the plate dimension along y direction is far larger than those in both x and z directions. The plane strain theory is applicable in this case and therefore the strain along y direction is zero.

RE: Timoshenko - Theory of Plates & Shells

Since Timoshenko was Russian, much of his work was translated which seems to give testimony to Bridgwater's statement " A little off topic but this thread calls attention to a typo in the book."

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources